Rachel Hecht1, Ming Li2, Quirina M B de Ruiter1, William F Pritchard1, Xiaobai Li3, Venkatesh Krishnasamy1, Wael Saad1, John W Karanian1, Bradford J Wood1. 1. Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. 2. Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. ming.li@nih.gov. 3. Biostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology Service, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and assess the accuracy of an augmented reality (AR) needle guidance smartphone application. METHODS: A needle guidance AR smartphone application was developed using Unity and Vuforia SDK platforms, enabling real-time displays of planned and actual needle trajectories. To assess the application's accuracy in a phantom, eleven operators (including interventional radiologists, non-interventional radiology physicians, and non-physicians) performed single-pass needle insertions using AR guidance (n = 8) and CT-guided freehand (n = 8). Placement errors were measured on post-placement CT scans. Two interventional radiologists then used AR guidance (n = 3) and CT-guided freehand (n = 3) to navigate needles to within 5 mm of targets with intermediate CT scans permitted to mimic clinical use. The total time and number of intermediate CT scans required for successful navigation were recorded. RESULTS: In the first experiment, the average operator insertion error for AR-guided needles was 78% less than that for CT-guided freehand (2.69 ± 2.61 mm vs. 12.51 ± 8.39 mm, respectively, p < 0.001). In the task-based experiment, interventional radiologists achieved successful needle insertions on each first attempt when using AR guidance, thereby eliminating the need for intraoperative CT scans. This contrasted with 2 ± 0.9 intermediate CT scans when using CT-guided freehand. Additionally, average procedural times were reduced from 13.1 ± 6.6 min with CT-guided freehand to 4.5 ± 1.3 min with AR guidance, reflecting a 66% reduction. CONCLUSIONS: All operators exhibited superior needle insertion accuracy when using the smartphone-based AR guidance application compared to CT-guided freehand. This AR platform can potentially facilitate percutaneous biopsies and ablations by improving needle insertion accuracy, expediting procedural times, and reducing radiation exposures.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and assess the accuracy of an augmented reality (AR) needle guidance smartphone application. METHODS: A needle guidance AR smartphone application was developed using Unity and Vuforia SDK platforms, enabling real-time displays of planned and actual needle trajectories. To assess the application's accuracy in a phantom, eleven operators (including interventional radiologists, non-interventional radiology physicians, and non-physicians) performed single-pass needle insertions using AR guidance (n = 8) and CT-guided freehand (n = 8). Placement errors were measured on post-placement CT scans. Two interventional radiologists then used AR guidance (n = 3) and CT-guided freehand (n = 3) to navigate needles to within 5 mm of targets with intermediate CT scans permitted to mimic clinical use. The total time and number of intermediate CT scans required for successful navigation were recorded. RESULTS: In the first experiment, the average operator insertion error for AR-guided needles was 78% less than that for CT-guided freehand (2.69 ± 2.61 mm vs. 12.51 ± 8.39 mm, respectively, p < 0.001). In the task-based experiment, interventional radiologists achieved successful needle insertions on each first attempt when using AR guidance, thereby eliminating the need for intraoperative CT scans. This contrasted with 2 ± 0.9 intermediate CT scans when using CT-guided freehand. Additionally, average procedural times were reduced from 13.1 ± 6.6 min with CT-guided freehand to 4.5 ± 1.3 min with AR guidance, reflecting a 66% reduction. CONCLUSIONS: All operators exhibited superior needle insertion accuracy when using the smartphone-based AR guidance application compared to CT-guided freehand. This AR platform can potentially facilitate percutaneous biopsies and ablations by improving needle insertion accuracy, expediting procedural times, and reducing radiation exposures.
Authors: Frank K Wacker; Sebastian Vogt; Ali Khamene; John A Jesberger; Sherif G Nour; Daniel R Elgort; Frank Sauer; Jeffrey L Duerk; Jonathan S Lewin Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Daipayan Guha; Naif M Alotaibi; Nhu Nguyen; Shaurya Gupta; Christopher McFaul; Victor X D Yang Journal: Can J Neurol Sci Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Waleed Shady; Elena N Petre; Mithat Gonen; Joseph P Erinjeri; Karen T Brown; Anne M Covey; William Alago; Jeremy C Durack; Majid Maybody; Lynn A Brody; Robert H Siegelbaum; Michael I D'Angelica; William R Jarnagin; Stephen B Solomon; Nancy E Kemeny; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-08-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Hannes Götz Kenngott; Anas Amin Preukschas; Martin Wagner; Felix Nickel; Michael Müller; Nadine Bellemann; Christian Stock; Markus Fangerau; Boris Radeleff; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Hans-Peter Meinzer; Lena Maier-Hein; Beat Peter Müller-Stich Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-03-30 Impact factor: 4.584